Tag Archives: ICIJ

Inclination of letters

We tend to act in certain ways. I am no exception (as you are about to find out). Yet, before we have a go at the BBC and another go at the ICIJ, lets take another look at how Microsoft has FAILED its audience. Now, this is not out in the open and I do not really reveal what has happened, but I am making a jab at it as it will set fortunes to Adobe and this is for their eyes only. So, there I was watching several presentations in the last 24 hours (from several sources) and something occurred to me, it was the third time when I heard something. My mind started to race and suddenly I wondered why Microsoft had left all this in the open, unsolved, unattended for a DECADE. It was so out in the open that I was wondering what on earth they were doing. Yes, their 365 solution is all about making sure their customers pay, and that I fine, but to leave gaps in their office solution out in the open for over a decade, how stupid is that. Yet, no fears. Adobe will fill up that hole nicely with their adjusted suite of programs which will start a new age in corporate needs and Microsoft will be looked at with the look of ‘How could you have been this stupid to such a degree?’ Yet I will not care, I will be giggling in a corner. Watching the wannabe’s seek jobs and seek solutions. 

So now we get to the main event. It is the BBC article ‘Hidden wealth of one of Putin’s ‘inner circle’ revealed’ (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61028866). There is so much wrong here, I almost do not know where to start, so the beginning it is. 

We see from the start “They reveal how a Swiss tattoo artist was falsely named as owner of a company that transferred over $300m (£230m) to firms linked to Suleiman Kerimov. They also show how $700m of transactions – and the secret ownership of luxury properties – went undetected. The investigation exposes failures of the banking system and the obstacles impeding Western sanctions.” It sounds nice, it really does. But lets take a closer look, shall we? 

Transactions worth $700m linked to Suleiman Kerimov and his closest business associates were reported as suspicious by banks between 2010 and 2015” So was anything done? Were ACTUAL crimes committed? ‘Suspicious’ is merely a word that shows no side towards legality. Then we get “Swiss accountant Alexander Studhalter posed as owner of properties actually owned by Mr Kerimov” So were laws broken? Was anything illegal done? The BBC shows itself to be as big a loser as the ICIJ shown it is. And when we get “Mr Kerimov was the secret owner of properties on the French Riviera and in London, including the most expensive terraced property ever sold in the UK” we see again the small setting ‘If he was a real secret owner, how did they find out?’ But the larger stage is whether LAWS were broken. The BBC does not really inform us of this, do they? They merely illuminate how useless journalists have become. Who is Suleiman Kerimov? I actually do not care. He is not part of my life, I never expect that to happen. But the BBC, the player claiming to be so trustworthy, where are they? Where is the list of broken laws? Where is the EVIDENCE showing us that laws were broken in Switzerland, the UK, and France? We can grasp at the Oligarch foundation all we want, but if we are a nation of laws we need to be shown the laws that were optionally (and allegedly) transgressed upon. So when we are finally given “Experts say Western countries have a lot of work to do because, for years, they have taken a lax approach to the fight against dirty money and failed to hold banks to account.” We see a clear path to something I have been stating for DECADES. Internationally tax laws need to be overhauled and politicians were lax, politicians were all about inaction and now we see the BS tap turned open all whilst we are not given the real deal. What laws were transgressed upon? I reckon that the answer will be none. I cannot tell because I am not a lawyer, I am not a tax lawyer and I am not an attorney. I have my Master of Intellectual property and when (or if) Amazon (or Google) buys my IP, my ship will arrive and I can retire nicely. Yet in this I have questions and the BBC answers none of them, so when we are finally given “In 2020, Swiru Holding accepted its involvement in evading the tax and was fined €1.4m and made to pay another €10.3m to settle the case. Mr Kerimov’s lawyer put out a statement saying that the French courts had “officially dismissed the allegations made by the former Nice Prosecutor against Suleiman Kerimov of having carried out money-laundering operations.”” We basically see a fine less then €12,000,000 for avoiding a taxable amount of €127,000,000 so as it seems crime pays and that is the part we do get to see. So when we are given how $700m of transactions were seemingly ‘undetected’ were laws broken? We are shown the transgression of 20% which was dealt with, but we have no information on the large amount and whether laws were broken. How come? We are given “The transaction was just one in a series of wire transfers carried out from 2010 to 2015 totalling $700m reported to US authorities as suspicious”, yet there is a large gap between ‘suspicious’ and ‘criminal’ and neither the ICIJ or the BBC give us anything on that, merely the alleged indignation. So is the BBC as useless as the ICIJ is showing itself to be? That is my question and I feel that this is not on James Oliver, Nassos Stylianou or Steve Swann. I believe that it is Francesca Mary Unsworth, chief editor of BBC News that needs to come forward and do some explaining on what should be seen as reporting and what should be seen as trivial filtering of news. 

I will let you decide what is what, but I reckon that the entire ICIJ mess needs a long hard look by a few people in all kinds of business walks.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

Where are we heading?

That is the stage we comment on and most comment on events in Europe, most would and that is not bad. But something happened in Lebanon that got my attention (something is always happening there). You see, many might have noticed ‘UAE set to be put on money laundering watchdog’s ‘grey list,’ report says’ (source: CNBC), we are given quotes like “The Financial Action Task Force, an intergovernmental organisation dedicated to combatting money laundering and illicit cash flows, is set to put the United Arab Emirates on its “grey list” over concerns that the Gulf country isn’t sufficiently stemming illegal financial activities”, now I am not debating it, it might be true, it might not. I cannot lay claims to events I have no data on. But whilst we see that, Reuters also gives us (at https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/lebanese-bank-closes-over-30-british-held-accounts-after-uk-ruling-depositors-2022-03-04/) ‘Lebanese bank closes over 30 British-held accounts after UK ruling-depositors’ group’. There we see “A Bank Audi official told Reuters the bank was “asking that the UK residents apply the terms applicable to anyone opening a new account: no international transfers, no cash withdrawals””, so just to help me out. You create a bank account and you are not allowed to withdraw cash? How does that make the bank a bank? And we also get “More than $100 billion remains stuck in a banking system paralysed since 2019, when the economy collapsed due to decades of unsustainable state spending, corruption and waste”, as such my question becomes what on earth is the Financial Action Task Force doing monitoring banks? First Credit Suisse, through state sponsored hacking and now we see Bank Audi. Two elements showing a massive cash stage running into the hundreds of billions. So what the hell is the Financial Action Task Force doing? Why are they not investigating banks? We see the mention of Switzerland, the United Arab Emirates, the mention of nations, not banks. Banks are seemingly flying below the radar and we see an alleged flaccid response from action groups. Oh and it would be nice to see specifics. Not some journo’s BS approach towards emotional garbage. I discussed this in ‘The presumption is mine’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2022/02/21/the-presumption-is-mine/) where I wrote “so all that space on what amounts to 0.03% of the entire amount. Just like the ICIJ, shortsighted and a waste of time. So we get repeated invitations to explain 0.03% of what is such a massive leak? Is anyone waking up yet?”, now if the FATF did its job and also gives us why the UAE needs to be on a grey list and NOT the bank it becomes a different story, optionally an acceptable one. That same setting applies to Switzerland, home to 242 banks and Credit Suisse. Oh, and before I forget the data leak never explained (it never will) why such harsh methods needs to be applied to the other 242 banks. No one ever asked that question, not other authorities, not the wannabe journalists either. Is that not weird too?

We need to see where we are going and what games certain parties are playing. I saw the Credit Suisse for nothing but a simple fishing expedition. A chumming exercise by the NSA (most likely culprit) to get some of the fish out there. And no one saw that? I am clever, but I am not that clever (compared to self proclaimed clever people), which (as I personally see it) implies orchestration. 

Am I right, am I wrong? I also ask that question from myself. The Switzerland setting alerted me to weirdness of it all, the UAE draws the setting to the surface. The UAE and its 20 local and 30 foreign banks. Yes that is also the case, so the FATF better come with a very good and very large folder with evidence on a whole range of banks. And before you think the UAE does nothing, we saw a week ago “The government confiscated assets worth $625m last year.” As such I hope that the FATF can prove its setting of “concerns that the Gulf country isn’t sufficiently stemming illegal financial activities” it seems that the UAE has proven activities, so is the FATF merely blowing its own horn? Perhaps it needs to look into the Audi bank and a few other banks too and several of them are not in Switzerland or the UAE. When we see quotes like “About $227.8 million money laundering in USA in 2020 according to our calculation that based 2020 Money Laundering Offense Report”, so how much did the US confiscate? Just asking.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

The presumption is mine

There is a setting that does not agree with me and I have seen this before. Yet before I do that there are two words we need to look at. The first one is speculation, it means ‘the activity of guessing possible answers to a question without having enough information to be certain’, then there is presumption ‘the ground, reason, or evidence lending probability to a belief’. So one is a guess, the other is an educated guess. It is always stronger than a guess, but it is till lacking certain levels of evidence and that is important to know.

This all started as I was just unwinding of several (too many) hours playing Horizons 2: Forbidden West. I started that second play-through without completing the first. I did this with the first game. You see, Eloy needs power and skill and running after the main quest (something I erroneously did in the first game) will not do it. You need skill points and the game is large, really really large and when you start finding adversaries that are (on land) a lot bigger than you think you will be either running for your life or running for cover. Those who go meet the challenge head on are shredded. Yet I digress (or do I)?

The Guardian gives us (at https://www.theguardian.com/news/2022/feb/20/credit-suisse-secrets-leak-unmasks-criminals-fraudsters-corrupt-politicians) where we see ‘Credit Suisse leak unmasks criminals, fraudsters and corrupt politicians’. There Is one problem. You see I do not think that this is happening, the Guardian was a happy tool just to get the exclusive. So as we are given:

Massive leak reveals secret owners of £80bn held in Swiss bank
Whistleblower leaked bank’s data to expose ‘immoral’ secrecy laws
Clients included human trafficker and billionaire who ordered girlfriend’s murder
Vatican-owned account used to spend €350m in allegedly fraudulent investment
Scandal-hit Credit Suisse rejects allegations it may be ‘rogue bank’

You see, my issue is that just like the ICIJ Pandora papers farce, this is an orchestration. I cannot say by who, we can point towards the NSA or a likeminded player (GCHQ), but the setting is larger. The US and EU are close to bankrupt, they play a nice tune, but the musical instrument has not been tuned for too long. A debt surpassing $30,000,000,000,000 and the EU is set to be in debt for about €10,973,338,444,376. They need to do something and going after some specific people is a first need. You cannot overhaul finances until certain ‘progressive entrepreneurs’ (aka white collar criminals) are dealt with ad the courts take too long, the problem is two fold. In the first the ICIJ was all about tantrums and BS, not much real useful info. We saw the accusations here and there with added ‘No actual laws were broken’ additions and it was a farce from beginning to end. Basic intelligence gathering acts were ignored, basic dashboarding was cast aside, and after 304 messages I know it was a wash. It was all about the power towards a ‘tax the rich’ flame which was happily drowned in whatever they used. Now we see the scolding of Credit Suisse and there are two parts here: 

  1. In the first they are accusations, so there will be a time gap, not a short one either. But it will be a message to ALL other banks that certain people have had enough.
  2. We see “billionaire who ordered girlfriend’s murder”, which might be fine, but which of the 2,755 billionaires was it? Well, the article gives us “his Lebanese pop star girlfriend”, so it might not be that hard. 

The issue is not the article perse, it is “A massive leak from one of the world’s biggest private banks, Credit Suisse, has exposed the hidden wealth of clients involved in torture, drug trafficking, money laundering, corruption and other serious crimes. Details of accounts linked to 30,000 Credit Suisse clients all over the world are contained in the leak, which unmasks the beneficiaries of more than 100bn Swiss francs (£80bn) held in one of Switzerland’s best-known financial institutions.

Let me take you through the numbers. There is not one employee that has access to the 30,000 accounts, so it is the CEO, CTO, CFO, or something like that. Do you think that they are the whistleblower? Nope? Neither do I! Then there is the IT, but Credit Suisse is global, so it we get back to the CTO. One IT person does not have this kind of access without getting caught. This level of data has all kinds of security. It needs to have it. Then there is the inside part Who is the drug trafficker? Who is the corrupt? Who is the torturer? This is not set into an account, it requires data aggregation, something a way to large computer can do but leakers tend to now have that access, without getting caught. And the Swiss laws are strict, massively strict so there is doubt on the stage of “held in one of Switzerland’s best-known financial institutions” as well. The levels of security and insight cannot come from a leaker, just like with the Pandora papers. I stated that from the beginning. This was a state operator and the NSA is the most likely culprit. The USA is in too much debt, it needs to release pressures and they are out of options. So when the ICIJ strikes out, we get this. 

I have worked in data for decades and I have had less then 5 instances where I had national levels of data access, but I was monitored all the time (as one does), one protects the data it has. And I was able to do my job and aid the people involved. In an age of data being currency, do you think this is some leak? An £80bn leak no less? Then there is “leak reveals secret owners of £80bn held in Swiss bank”, a bullshit header if ever there was one. You see Swiss bank laws are strict, very strict and have been for a very long time but someone wants access and a leak would never reveal that. Such information can only come from state players, players with aggregated data on a very large level and there is every indication that the dat did not come from the bank but from other sources who transferred the funds from one to the other. The setting of ‘Credit Suisse leak unmasks criminals, fraudsters and corrupt politicians’ debunked in mere minutes. It took me at least 4 times longer to type this all. And when we get one example where the article is so ‘huge’, we get “the leaked Credit Suisse data shows his accounts were left open until at least well into the last decade. At one point after he left Siemens, one account was worth 54m CHF (£24m). Seidel’s lawyer declined to say whether the accounts were his. He said his client had addressed all outstanding matters relating to his bribery offences and wished to move on with his life”, as well as “The lawyer did not respond to repeated invitations to explain the source of the 54m CHF. Siemens said it did not know about the money and that its review of its own cashflows shed no light on the account”, so all that space on what amounts to 0.03% of the entire amount. Just like the ICIJ, shortsighted and a waste of time. So we get repeated invitations to explain 0.03% of what is such a massive leak? Is anyone waking up yet? 

This is about something else, it always was and in this the Guardian is allowing themselves (yet again) to be the tool in all this. It is not rocket science and it took me minutes to debunk a setting that is intentionally being misrepresented by 5 writers, I did this all alone in less then an hour (including the writing), so what fairy tale will the newspapers (via a state actor) serve up next?

Charging in full frontal will get some state players shredded, so they decided on the Eloy solution, illuminate from the tall grass and stay out of sight, plenty of players eager to take that limelight.

2 Comments

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

Cives tantum

It is an old setting, I forgot about it for the longest of times. You see in the old days there were announcers, they would give the people the knowledge of the events taking place. Yet in some cases some area’s would not be told everything. It was a case of ‘citizens only’, a filtering of what non-citizens needed not know. It still happens today, governments and corporations are filtering the news to protect their interests. So what happens when everyone demands to know?

It started a few days ago, but today I see another setting, a setting that goes beyond filtering, a setting that we need to know about. Several outlets reported on ‘UAE intercepts Houthi missile as Israeli president visits’ (at https://aje.io/jww3hn), I am taking the Al Jazeera link (it was a lot shorter) but they all give the same news. We are given “The UAE is part of a Saudi-led coalition fighting the Iran-aligned Houthis in Yemen, in a seven-year-old conflict that has left tens of thousands of people dead, displaced millions and spawned what the United Nations describes as the world’s worst humanitarian crisis”, we are given the news, we are given the news again and again, yet the important part in this is not merely the attack. It is the part that is left away from us. It is the part that Houthi forces cannot create (and allegedly operate) drones and ballistic missiles. There is no infrastructure, there is no knowledge and there is no manufacturing options. There is only one setting, Iran is delivering and optionally operating the events. There is an additional side that involves Hezbollah, but that evidence is too slim to consider even whilst Iran is the larger culprit, Hezbollah is for now not off the hook. 

Yet the media is all but silenced on the involvement of Iran. Those idiots had no issues spouting innuendo, nonsense and fabrication regarding the journalist no one cares about (Jamal Khashoggi), but in case of Iran all these settings are not working, there is a need to keep Iran out of the limelight and I wonder why that is. Consider the knowledge we have, the smuggling we see and the non activities against Iran. Why is the media keeping us in the dark? Who are they catering for? All questions that we do not see answered. And even as some players (read: BBC) are now handing us the Children in Yemen, they did not do it until 3 hours after I posted my blog, which was 10 hours after the ABC posted it. So the BBC who tends to lead was now 13 hours late on Children used by Houthi forces, another filter on Yemen, and I reckon that too many were posting, so they could no longer hold off, they merely delayed and posted the minimal numbers with the occasional error in calculations. Too many people are filtering the events Iran is a part of. Too many are not mentioning Iran driven events and many are not questioning certain events and it has been going on since before 14 September 2019, but that too was not decently looked at, was it?

Civis Tantum was to some degree acceptable in those days 2000 years ago, but today the press states again and again that they are all fair and balanced, shining light on the darkness that threatens democracy and whatever other claim they can make. So, when you see these questions, all whilst we see them not come from them, with all the other failings from drone strikes to hacking and even the ICIJ, a much larger failing is given to us, we are merely told what those looking over their shoulders allow them to tell us, so how is that independent and revealing?

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics

The more it stays the same

 On one side it is nice to the the US of A being s stupid as they were in the age of Joseph McCarthy. In the time he was in office (January 3, 1953 – January 3, 1955) he was able to become one of the strongest black pages in American history. To be honest, I cannot say whether the fear was real or not, this was all before my time. Yet the largest station of fear created was also the setting of the cold war, the anti Communism events and a whole lot of other settings, like McCarthyism and the second red scare. The problem is that there was a massive absence of evidence. We see the practice of making accusations of subversion and treason, whilst there was an absence of evidence. Flaming was as good as it got and the media was part of this. The USA is now in a similar stance like ‘Tax the rich’, and the setting of ‘US sanctions drone maker DJI’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-59703521) is now out in the open. We get to see “It has been alleged that DJI’s drone technology has been used for the surveillance of Uyghur Muslims in China.” If there was concrete evidence it is one thing, but to see ‘alleged’ so conviction without evidence is more than harsh. It shows how deep the US has sunk, a setting of BS and accusations that are followed up by convictions on alleged events. And all this is ‘simmered down’ by “the ban is largely symbolic as DJI is not a publicly-traded company”, my personal guess is that you miss the facts that follow, like “The company had close to an 80% market share in consumer drones last year in the US, according to Drone Industry Insights”, you see, it is a personal observation. Yet I believe that Huawei and DJI are showing the US how insignificant they have become. If I can come up with a dozen pieces of New IP, all whilst showing the US has nothing to oppose it, as I saw a solution where DARPA and the NSA struck out. When I created new 5G IP that NO ONE has, when I create movie ideas and new classes of hardware when the US and its companies have nothing to oppose me with I have shown to be the stronger party and that is why it is in hidden places in 4Chan. That is why, because the USA cannot steal it, they can replicate it and when I give the world the clear locations an how they can be read, all whilst at present one IP shows well over 10,000 hits, they will have no option but to admit that I got there first and before the market realised that China was there first. That is the benefit that they have in 5G, that is why the US keeps on lagging, and that is before you realise that the 6G advertisements might be preemptive as Huawei was already making headway there.

So as we realise that we re being told story after story, the realisation needs to be on what evidence there is. So when you read “Reuters has reported that the Biden administration is considering imposing more sanctions on China’s biggest chip-maker Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation” why this is done, to herald in a new era of McCarthyism now aimed at China, or is there evidence? You see if there was clear evidence and it was presented it would have been a different thing, but they haven’t done that and the BBC hiding behind ‘alleged’ is a problem, it is a huge problem because it implies that the rest of the world has no freedom of choice, if can only choose stuff that is approved by the Uncommonly Skint of America. When did you sign up for that? 

This is not some anti-America rant. I am not anti-American. I am anti-stupid and for the most the media can no longer be trusted. They did this to themselves. In all this I would be happy to be wrong, it merely requires the US to present evidence, a stage that is very unlikely to ever happen, they have done this before, and they will likely do this again. And whilst we see news on how much taxes Elon Musk will pay this year, no one is looking at the other 613 billionaires and the 5000 people who own well over $100,000,000, why is that you think? Why do we get flamed article by the ICIJ when evidence shows that a tax overhaul is essential and no one is moving into that direction, no the people will get a new version of McCarthyism, all flames and no adherence to evidence. You look for yourself and you judge, do not take my word for it, learn what is being done and then decide for yourself.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics, Science

From one to the other

That is a setting we are all familiar with. We get one and it tends to lead to the other. This is as generic as it can be stated and it applies to pretty much anything. In my case it is more than speculation, although it is important to realise that speculation is part of this setting. The idea started recently as I got a hold of an interesting PDF, there are many like it, but this one is now downloaded and mine (a Stanley Kubrick pun). It is also a larger station in the actions of the CIA and NSA towards the ICIJ (their favourite tool) and the Pandora Papers. You know that trough of information with millions of documents and relying mostly on flames and 600 essay writers. There was a side I had suspected, but I am (still) lacking in evidence. Yet suddenly my eyes cross a research paper that was published in 2016. It is called ‘Analysing How People Orient to and Spread Rumours in Social Media by Looking at Conversational Threads’, yet the more I saw of it, the more the secondary station became ‘Analysing How People Orient to instigated Rumours in Media by starting Conversational Threads’. The research gives a lot and the setting of the ICIJ and the insanely stupid articles written by essay writers is starting to show a new surface. Now, I cannot state that this is the CIA and NSA, but the amount of transgressions leave the NSA as only viable option and as this is a stage to change the international political grounds of the US it seems more than likely that the CIA is holding the hands of the NSA (courting them) and that is a speculative view, but it is the one I have.

Consider the hundreds of thousands of documents. Consider the headlines we have seen and now we see ‘Panama Paper leaks: More than Rs 20,000 cr undisclosed credits detected for 930 India-linked entities, says govt’ (source: Times of India) and all whilst they still have had no time to make a dashboard. Now we can go with “India’s Income Tax Department has detected total undisclosed credits worth Rs 20,353 crore for 930 India-linked entities in the Panama and Paradise paper leaks, the government Parliament on Tuesday.” We can accept that, or realise that someone is there as a secondary channel whispering certain people certain things via another channel. Like: “I just noticed something interesting. Did someone look at the tax records of …..?” Yes, it is a bit of a stretch, but when you seek the original raw files and consider how many people were ‘suddenly’ found all whilst the ICIJ never gave a clear dashboard implies that there is some form of orchestration and no one is asking questions, especially the media.

We can go all conspiracy theory on this, or we can analyse (I opt for the second one), when you set out those threads things make little sense, it is almost top-line reporting by the chaotic, and I do not really go for that. 

To understand the link with the two elements, I offer “The spread of misinformation is especially important in the context of breaking news, where new pieces of information are released piecemeal, often starting off as unverified information in the form of a rumour. These rumours then spread to large numbers of users, influencing perception and understanding of events, despite being unverified. Social media rumours that are later proven false can have harmful consequences both for individuals and for society” from the article. In it self a statement, a theory (one that has been proven correctly) but a simple observation. I am altering it (to a small extent) to give us “where new pieces of information are released piecemeal, often handed to us as ‘from anonymous sources’ giving us a speculative ‘more than a rumour’ and eagerly accepted by the hungry, angry and frustrated media observers.” Here we need to observe two elements. Because my version fits, does not make it true, the data of this research was captured with other means and other observational investigations, you cannot take a research on Apples and a research on pears and combine them into research on fruit. It does not work that way, yet the eery side of how certain stages match and the ICIJ with their “We got it as long as we did not investigate the source”, If it was GCHQ, DGSE, FSB or the MSS, these 600 essay writers would be all over the limelight breaking that deal after the data was received, leaving us with the NSA and by popular foreign demand the CIA as a linked buddy. 

So, yes there is speculation and as long as you realise that you are OK. Yet the document (added at the end) shows a few more images (as phrases go) and that sets in motion a larger area of consideration (which is not the same as a larger stage). At first we see “One of the main challenges when studying rumours is to come up with a sound definition of the concept”, as well as “Highly reputable users such as news organisations tend to support rumours, irrespective of them being eventually confirmed or debunked, tweet with certainty and provide evidence within their tweets.” And when you combine the two you see the fictive validity of the ICIJ (as I personally see it). There is a snag, it is not out in the open, but the population at large is more and more questioning what defines a ‘reputable users’ and as such news organisations catering to certain elements are less and less seen as reputable. And there are cases all over the world where being first tends to imply that vetting can be done afterward. Not unlike the image below.

So as we see the escalation of the Pandora Papers more and more lacking clear evidence and relying on flames, there is now a perspective view that the CIA is setting a stage where THEIR political stage is altered and less desirable political players (and their wealthy friends) are suddenly in the limelight, with al the angry people aimed through emotional articles and flames.

Am I right? Am I wrong? 

I honestly do not know, but there is more and more published evidence adding to my side of the scales and it does not look good for the global press at present, or perhaps to the pool of media supporting the ICIJ with their own essay writers. I will let you decide, yet consider what is already out there and how the media is spiking its population to themselves for all kinds of reasons and why the neutral absolute truth is not considered. I am not super intelligent (more intelligent than most), as such others especially in media would have seen these elements, but somehow they do not report it, why?

I will let you brood over that part of the equation.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics

When is limelight a void?

I stumbled upon an article be Al Dia Politics. A source I do not know, but I saw something that reflects on my findings. The article (at https://aldianews.com/articles/politics/what-happened-revelations-pandora-papers-latam/68469) gives us ‘What happened to the revelations of the Pandora Papers in LATAM?’ My first feeling is ‘What Revelations?’ You see, the ICIJ and everyone parroting them is a group of emotional flamers, flamers never bring revelations, they merely say they do and then spin that shit, they always do. So when I see “After the results of an investigation last October revealed tax havens for the world’s most powerful, after-effects have been null and void.

As I see it there are two reasons

  1. There was never a summary of who was involved, it is merely a beacon to flame things as many flames as possible, especially by these essay writers (aka journalists). 
  2. Were there any crimes committed?

These two give an inkling that there was nothing to act on. The stage is that zero tax havens are legal, the UAE, Monaco, Cayman Islands, Bermuda, Andorra, Bahrain and a few others are nations that have zero tax, it is their approach to make things run and attract investment dollars. They have a legal right to do this, it is the other nations that have not cleaned up their tax laws (including the US and several other nations). 

Why does this matter?
The US has a little over 24 hours before it hits its debt limit as per Janet Yellen’s statement. So I reckon it will take a day before the media will flame leagues of tax the rich articles claiming that they are merely reporting. It is also almost a month away since I made the claim 25 years ago that tax systems needed to be overhauled. So there are two reasons to watch this from the sidelines. A stage that I will enjoy because no matter how bad my situation is, I was right all along and when I checked certain counters, it seems that other documentation will hit here too, the counter is around 75% of where it needs to be. 

Then (back to the story) we see something that might be a revelation “It is important to remember that the names revealed by the investigation have been involved in the diversion of capital and the concealment of fortunes, which translates to tax evasion. Among those involved were Sebastián Piñera, president of Chile, and Guillermo Lasso, his counterpart from Ecuador, and their respective governments investigated them seeking to find evidence to remove them from office.” There is a chance that the Pandora papers were an CIA and NSA operation to secure funds for the US whilst changing the political lands they were facing. This matters because no government has ever done this to this degree. It could show that the US is truly desperate without pissing off their friends (like the Koch family), it also means that there will be no overhaul of tax laws making matters worse for them and perhaps two other players.

There is a larger political stage, but I am not the best source for that, especially in Latin America. But it also draws a few other settings, the fact that the ICIJ would make no attempts to find the source, this reeked and the ICIJ should have known better, because there is now the need for a list of 600 essay writers that catered to the US governmental needs, people never considered that part did they? And it helps the US to get flames rolling on their ‘tax the rich’ groups, especially when the need is escalating way beyond dire. And I am not one to be nice, especially to certain groups that think that they are above anything, so there will be a need for these 600 names soon enough and then? How much credibility will these newspapers and media outlets have when that comes to light?

We see all these articles on house meetings and investigations, but we see nothing on results and reporting of that nature. OK, the Guardian did have a piece where we saw in October regarding former Prime Minister Tony Blair “While there was nothing illegal about the transaction, and there is no evidence the Blairs proactively sought to avoid stamp duty”. A hole page of wasted space, mentions of ‘could’ and no substance. And in all these months no dashboard (something I would have started in the first hour), the limelight on void issues, no illegality and merely stomping and pretending. So, yet in a trove with 12,000,000+ documents, the CIA/NSA will have something for you, but is it stuff you care about? 

At this point I care about that list of 600 essay writers and the amount of money they cost whilst not bringing anything real to the media. I have actually met troll-hunters who got more real work done in one day that these 600 essay writers in months. Ponder that for a second. 

When the media is setting up the limelights to waste it on a void, you know that they are catering to a powerful population and we get no real information because that would make some people really nervous at present. So I am guessing that there will be a new wave of ‘tax the rich’ this month, all whilst the Us (EU too) have not overhauled any of the tax laws that required overhauling. What say you?

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media

A two sided sword

It is nice (novel too) when the press does your work. Al Jazeera (at https://aje.io/xvndmj) with the headline ‘Nobel Peace Prize winners warn of growing disinformation threat’, which sounds nice, but the complication is that the press is part of the problem, in the last two years 

I looked at issues with the NSO group, Jamal Khashoggi (the reporter no one cares about), one sided accusations against Saudi Arabia, bungled investigations involving Jeff Bezos (and the UN), Ignoring the events from Iran and Houthi forces and that running joke known as the ICIJ with their papers of hope (Pandora papers). All issues that show the press being part of the problem, not a solution. All vying for digital dollars any way they can. 

So when I see “Maria Ressa of the Philippines said the greatest threat to democracy is “when lies become facts”, while Dmitry Muratov of Russia said society is currently in a dangerous “post-truth period””, I am not opposing Maria Ressa, I am stating that the disinformation problem is a lot larger than what we hear and journalists are part of that problem. 

Journalists have with some regularity placed themselves on the axial of a seesaw and tried to keep a balance between events taking place and Stakeholders that need things go certain ways (my speculation/presumption). It is a setting that have been going on since 2012 (which is when I started to take notice). So when I see “Muratov also told Al Jazeera that disinformation was a significant and growing threat. “Manipulation leads to war,” he said. “We are in the middle of a post-truth period. Now, everyone is concerned about their own ideas and not the facts,” Muratov said” I feel an involuntary giggle coming up. It is correct what he states, but the part of ‘Manipulation leads to war’, was this communicated to the morning breakfast shows? Was this communicated to newspapers who do this way too often? 

Yes there are problems and they are all over the place, yet the press is part of the problem, it stopped being part of the solution when shareholders needed to see more money from news outlets. A plate for pigs and there are too many pigs and the plate is seemingly getting smaller. 

So it needs to be clear, I am not opposing the person who achieved the standing of winning a Nobel price, I am however pointing towards the wannabe’s behind these people maximising digital coins at the expense of clear reporting. In case of the ICIJ, has anyone seen a clear dashboard giving us numbers of people per nation, nations with government people involved and non-government people? No, you haven’t. More importantly when we see the stage of those in zero tax nations (and their right to be there), what is left? In that stage we see the ICIJ speak like parrots, repeating the same thing over and over without any real revelations, any real criminal activities. So when you see “The new data reveals confidential information about the owners of offshore entities mostly registered in the British Virgin Islands, a notoriously secretive jurisdiction, between 1980 and 2018.” You get no real information, merely some silly essay person waving his dick. The problem is that this so called “confidential information about the owners of offshore entities”, is absent of criminal activities. It is about tax laws and these clowns have not achieved anything, merely made you all angry that some people get LEGALLY away with avoiding taxation. So Boo Hoo flipping Hoo. 

So I get it that some journalists should receive protection, but in my personal view, we could do without those 600 at the ICIJ brilliantly. The term of “when lies become facts” sounds really nice, but that means that we hold journalists and what they write accountable, an act that hasn’t been the case for the longest of times, should you doubt that, read the Leveson report. The stage is changing and to some degree journalists and news outlets are responsible for that mess. Consider that the big papers which include the Wall Street Journal, The Times, the LA Times, the Washington Post, the Boston globe and the NY Times. How many did a real piece on how tax laws have failed a nation? None as fr as I can tell, they are all screaming ‘Tax the Rich’ but it were these tax laws that got them in that setting. The disregarded acts by Iran are visible all over by the bulk of these papers seemingly disregard these parts, just like the assaults by Houthi’s but they are all eager to slam the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, one sided reporting is disinformation, I hope that this is clear? Filtered information (like morning shows) is also a form of disinformation and they all serve some stakeholder (as I personally see it).

A stage that has to change and it should start with those calling themselves journalists. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics

It is difficult

One one hand, thee was a reason to be joyful. There was another article by Stephanie Kirchgaessner, so let the bashing begin. On the other hand, this is actually a good article. It is also an important article. And there is a stage where we need to consider what is and what could be. The article ‘Rights groups urge EU to ban NSO over clients’ use of Pegasus spyware’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/law/2021/dec/03/rights-groups-urge-eu-to-ban-nso-over-clients-use-of-pegasus-spyware). This is interesting in two ways. We see no such ban on Remington, Fabrique national, Glock and a few other firms. And I would like to add that the NSA has done worse, much worse, so why is it now onto the NSO because their clients are skating on the edge of what some people might seem as ‘unacceptable’?

We see “Letter signed by 86 organisations asks for sanctions against Israeli firm, alleging governments used its software to abuse rights”, we see it, but do we realise what is going on? We are holding the publisher of a law book accountable for criminals using those books to stay out of prison. And it is not mere criminals using the books, it is governments using the books. 

This is a slippery slope and as Stephanie Kirchgaessner illuminates this, we are left with questions. I personally want to see a list of these 86 organisations. I am not saying that the Guardian is lying, I am stating that the NSO and us have a right to see these accusers. Yes, we see Access Now, Amnesty International and the Digital Rights Foundation. But where are the others? We also see “the EU’s sanctions regime gave it the power to target entities that were responsible for “violations or abuses that are of serious concern as regards to the objectives of the common foreign and security policy, including violations or abuses of freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, or of freedom of opinion and expression””, it is here that the problem starts. We see “freedom of opinion and expression”, but who allows for that? Who allows for ‘peaceful assembly’? Consider the US and their ‘Black Lives Matter’ setting. We see “Some states have recently increased the severity of criminal penalties for protesters along political lines”, so where is your freedom of expression and opinion now? 

There is an issue, there is and in this Stephanie is right, but is there any kind of stage where the NSO can be held responsible for the actions of their clients? What do you think will happen when the NSO sells what they have to China and/or Russia? Do you think these 86 organisations will have anything to say then? 

And there is a larger stage, the stage everyone is silent about, the stage we all know but no one is willing to look there. We are so willing to blame the NSO group, but no one is wondering why Apple and Google didn’t have better protection? We can understand that there are always, but they do not seem to work and for some reason, Apple and Google have a massive problem. So when we consider Forbes ‘Apple Starts Sending NSO Hack Warnings To iPhone Users’, why was this not done earlier, and more important why was the problem not fixed 5 years ago? Apple is playing the cautious game, leaving the NSO group out of the debate with “State-sponsored attackers are very well-funded and sophisticated, and their attacks evolve over time. Detecting such attacks relies on threat intelligence signals that are often imperfect and incomplete. It’s possible that some Apple threat notifications may be false alarms, or that some attacks are not detected. We are unable to provide information about what causes us to issue threat notifications, as that may help state-sponsored attackers adapt their behaviour to evade detection in the future.” So why are new phones not more secure? Why are cyber locks a problem? Because Apple (Google too) caters to people who need automation to get better and more revenue and that crosses with the needs of some players who need access. 

In all this, the simplest solution was that no one gets access to your mobile, and it is not a new concept. The Blackberry started that idea and was quickly pushed out of the market (they were not the cheapest either). I saw this come up a few times when I was considering the evolution of a console (name xxxxxxxx redacted) , but the premise is larger and it is all linked to the simple setting that Facebook opened a door and EVERYONE wants to get through. In this case the NSO group saw that as a great idea to collect information and they are not alone, let that be clear, they might be the most visible player, but they are not the only player, but the article does not give that part, do they? You see there were a few nations on the list (that everyone ignores) and they are not NSO group clients, but they have certain abilities, so they are a client of someone and these 86 organisations are about to give that one player (with no scruples) the entire market.

Did you consider that?

Moreover, the accusations from some against the NSO group are still absent of evidence. Several newspapers gave light that the list of 10,000 was bogus and it was from 2017. In addition, I found the financial link missing, 10,000 hacks implied that the NSO group had received in excess of $600,000,000 and they have not. Some give us specifically worded accusations. Like the Citizens Lab giving us that 36 phones might (emphasis on might) have been transgressed upon, 36 out of 76, and we seemingly delete the word ‘might’ with our minds, but I did not. I am not opposing the Citizens Lab, but 36 might out of a debatable list of 10,000 is a long stretch and so far none of the media have given us any clear evidence, but these 86 organisations see there limelight moment, so they are all crying foul (or is that fowl). 

I for one want to see the media become responsible and hand over a dashboard of alleged victims. 10,000 numbers, that would be a massive list, but a dashboard stating how many are government, how many are journalists (which was in one article no more than 180, I think) making that a mere 1.8%. How many infections per nation? The list goes on and the media over all these months presented ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. But now we see “Letter signed by 86 organisations asks for sanctions against Israeli firm”, all whilst no clear evidence has been presented EVER. This is ab out something else and it has nothing to do with the NSO group, it has everything to do with a group of journalists who have become obsolete and as we see event after even (like that running Joke called the ICIJ), how much evidence have we see on their so called 11.9 million leaked documents with 2.9 terabytes of data, and zero (none) dashboard giving a summary, even with all that time and 600 journalists no one had time to give us a run down, that is how pathetic the media has become. Oh and they promised not to investigate the source, interesting is it not?

All flaming for digital revenue and presenting close to nothing, flames and way too little  substance. So when we ask these media players for clarity, their most likely answer will be ‘It is difficult’

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media

Stupid people never learn

This is not an accusation, it is merely a setting we need to accept. This all started half an hour Aho when the BBC gave us ‘Protesters hit Amazon buildings on Black Friday’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-59419572), with the setting “An international coalition of unions, equality and environmental groups called “Make Amazon Pay” is staging a day of action, demanding concessions”, it is like the approach of a hurricane, and making the one person who left a window open giving him (or her) a bill for the draft damage. People just do not get it, and I am at a loss why that is. It is not hidden information, it is not secret information, it merely is information out in the open for anyone to read.

The setting is not “Amazon takes too much and gives back too little”, the setting is that governments would not overhaul tax laws for the longest of times. I first make a case for overhauling tax laws in 1998, now 24 year later none of it EVER happened. Amazon did not take too much, it took what Amazon was entitled to take. Amazon (only) gives what it is mandated to give. There are las out there and Amazon, Netflix, Apple, Facebook and Google adhere to these laws. All the rest is merely discriminatory bullshit. So when I see “Worldwide, nearly 50 organisations have signed up to a list of “common demands”, published by the Make Amazon Pay coalition”, so I wonder who they are. And it does not really matter as they cross over from one into the other. Consider “A global union federation representing 50 million workers in 140 countries in a range of sectors”, this implies less then 350.000 per nation, which includes the US, which imply that they basically amount to nothing. Then we get “A global union federation of journalists’ trade unions, representing more than 600.000 media workers from 187 organisations in 146 countries” I merely wonder whether they include the same essay writers that grace the ICIJ, a fair question, because journalists are supposed to be smarter than this. All the flames, the bullshit and the need for click bitches that spike digital revenue, all to have a go at a company that struck it big by being actually innovative. 2 years ago Amazon would not be on the mind of console gaming. Now the Amazon Luna overtakes what Google and Microsoft have and that is just for starters. They equal Apple in a few ways and there is no end to Amazon at present. All that and they adhere to laws, or lets just states that they adhere to what their legal department states that they need to adhere to. And no one is putting actual and factual pressure on the politicians that need to get shit done (like overhauling tax laws) but then people get quotes like “It is a really complex situation”, so complex that in 24 years nothing was done, so the utter nonsense of 50 organisations that have call signs making them close to ludicrously useless. If they were not useless, they would put pressure on politicians overhauling tax laws. 

The lesson has been out there for almost 25 years, the facts were out there for almost 25 years and still the people will not learn, the politicians do not want them to learn, because they will have to do something and over time it might amount to something pissing of the rich friends they have. In all this, the setting is much larger then the FAANG group. It includes people like the Walton Family, the Green family, the Koch family, the Yuan family and as such several dozens more. All billionaires, all doing what the law allowed them to do. The feigned anger against Amazon is just pointless bullshit and we need to wake up. Flames and emotions will not get us anywhere and that is the problem with Grassroots people, all about anger and emotion and when the anger subsides, when they realise (if ever) that the law was adhered to we see the pointlessness of the situation and stupid people never do so, in this, how come the journalists are part of this? Who do they serve? Because in the end they serve the shareholders and advertisers. But what of their stakeholders? Who are they and why are they embracing pointless actions? Did you ever consider that part of the equation? 

As such will you learn, or will you just pointlessly embrace a coalition that wastes another two decades going nowhere? It is up to you, you can chose and making the choice that goes somewhere is always better, even if the destination is not better, sometimes things get worse before they get better, that is the outcome of change, the changing process is never better, the outcome can be, it is up to us to make that so, and it is not an easy fight, that much is an absolute given.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics